Comments on: One Last Look Back

By: Nick D Pags

Nick D Pags — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 06:14:36 +0000

Thanks for the clarity guys.
Real helpers.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 03:11:04 +0000

@Nick D Pags

Please work on your reading comprehension.

Paul meant that he’s dreaming about Rowling revisiting the Harry Potter universe. However, by saying that it will happen after Lucas releases more Star Wars films, implies that it isn’t likely.

How he feels about Lucas doesn’t even come into play.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 03:05:03 +0000

Thanks, Sam.

I just went through the trouble of typing up an explanation, and glanced up to see that you already got that taken care of.

Good job.

By: Sam

Sam — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 02:57:44 +0000

@Nick D Pags
Not to be “that guy” but, he said he was 18 when the first book came out, which would be 1997, but was dating someone 5 years his junior when half blood prince came out, 2005, so he was probably a 26 year old dating a 21st-25th year old.

By: Nick D Pags

Nick D Pags — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 02:22:54 +0000

@ Andy
Please clarify that you weren’t dating a 13 year old. Thanks.

@ Paul
George Lucas making new movies is what nightmares are made of, you can’t truly be dreaming about that.

By: Sam

Sam — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 02:06:02 +0000

Are you sure that was Stephen king that said that? I’ve always heard it attributed to some guy named Andrew futral. But it sounds like something King would say.
I for one love the books, I’m in the middle of reading the fourth one for the third time. I also love the movies, I would personally rank them as my absolute all-time favorite film series. Sure, I already know what will happen but its still so great to actually see that translated into film, to see what they changed, what they kept the same etc. But the movies are all so well made from the acting, the effects, everything, that it doesn’t matter that you know how it’ll all end, you just get sucked into it all. The movies aren’t perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but that’s part of the appeal. You love them despite their flaws, which actually aren’t too many when you get right down to it.
I just saw part 2 of the deathly hallows and I honestly, truthfully, think its deserving of at least a best picture nomination, if not a win. Now at first glance that may seem totally crazy. But considering the difficulty of making 8 cohesive films in the same universe over the course of ten years and you can honestly say there isn’t a “bad” one in the bunch, that is nothing short of the greatest cinematic achievement ever if you ask me. If return of the king can win best picture for the grand scope of the trilogy, why not harry potter?

By: Random Leon

Random Leon — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 20:38:15 +0000

never a fan of the movies. loved the first 4 books. ending to book 7 was a massively anti-climactic cop-out. also, series could easily have been 6 books long if it weren’t for horcruxes and hamfisted politics.

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:56:13 +0000

It took quite a lot of prodding for me to start reading the series, as I was 18 when the first book dropped. Yeah, an 18-year-old is gonna read a kid’s book…

It wasn’t until Half-Blood Prince came out and my girlfriend, who was 5 years younger than me, pushed the series on me. I’m glad she did. I remember staying up way late at night finishing books in one sitting.

I was never too much of a fan of the movies, for reasons that were already mentioned. You know what’s gonna happen, and they have to cut out a ton of content to give the films a sensible runtime.

By: Cube

Cube — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 18:13:12 +0000

The book were great. If you read them you would find that the storytelling grew with the characters. There is a ton of stuff that the movies had to leave out but they are solid movies by themselves. Neville is a bigger character in the books but I hear he gets some more time in this movie. Hope to see it this weekend.

By: Hallam

Hallam — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:04:54 +0000

I never liked the books; I’m assuming I was a couple of years older than I needed to be to enjoy them as they came out. I only read the first one and part of the second one, but still, my guess is that the movies are better; since the only way you can’t know what is going to happen in the overlooong books anyway is, well, being a kid.

HP was the Twilight of my generation and it was cool to hate it. When I was 15, those were the books read by teens that wouldn’t touch a real book, which is what everyone really hates about Twilight.

And let’s face it, they’re decently written, but the argument in the first books isn’t suited even for a tween: everything depends on dumb luck, adults conveniently step aside, everyone gets a prize at the end, no sacrifice goes ultimately unrewarded and so forth. No real “facing adversity” lessons until the series was already successful. Everything is thoroughly explained and schematized along thousands of pages, so imagination reduces to “like x, only magical and in latin”, all the while borrowing too heavily from previous fantasy-fiction works on what magic was or wasn’t. “The little prince”, with just a handful of pages, is infinitely superior, in its lesson, style, profundity, wit and imagination.

Well, HP doesn’t bother me now. He grew up, the books acquired a Star-Wars-like charm and “classic” status; plus, I’ve gotta say, HP fans aren’t annoying at all. It just became so familiar, harmless and enjoyable, and I’d much rather have my kids read HP than nothing at all. And eventhough you give Rownling’s writing too much credit –she’s only MILES away from Meyer and I don’t even think she’s any better than Dan Brown– she always seemed to have the right intentions.

So, HP with his millions of SANE fans, truly deserves a spot in the 00′s culture. It made a bunch of kids read and gave us a decent movie saga while not being a pain in the ass or a shameful influence like Twilight. I’ll miss it.